More Dogs than Kids (Los Angeles, San Francisco: 2013, neighborhood, public schools)

[Simon Feltser]

Did you know there are MORE dogs than kids in the city of San Francisco?
In fact, dog lovers, as a group, is so large that they’re forming a PAC (Political Action Committee) to endorse candidates in various political races.

There is approximately 108,000 children and approximately 150,000 dogs in SF. Figures may be others, but the ratio remains

So why the shifting trend?
1. New parents are moving out of SF to seek lower cost but larger housing
2. Aging boomers, straight and gay couples are choosing to have a dog instead In fact, the “dog effect” is so strong in SF that politicians frequently debate issues related to pets, animal services, shelters, etc.

Seriously, I’m a dog lover, but the fact that there are more dogs than kids is unnerving to me. Are dogs replacing kids?

[Tulemutt]

Having had a long lifetime of both - love my kids, but happy to keep having dog after dog

That said, if you miss seeing scobs and scobs of kids around SF, head down to the Marina Green and Crissy Field. Wall to wall strollers, kids, AND dogs! No one told this neighborhood about trending away from making babies.

[ambient]

That families have had to largely abandon SF is nothing new or surprising. There probably isn't a huge concentration of families in Manhattan, either. Probably the only people who can actually have families and own property in either location are multi-millionaires.

[felinius]

Originally Posted by Simon Feltser

So why the shifting trend?
1. New parents are moving out of SF to seek lower cost but larger housing
2. Aging boomers, straight and gay couples are choosing to have a dog instead In fact, the “dog effect” is so strong in SF that politicians frequently debate issues related to pets, animal services, shelters, etc.

Seriously, I’m a dog lover, but the fact that there are more dogs than kids is unnerving to me. Are dogs replacing kids?

Wouldn't it be easier to have a small dog in a studio than it would be to have a child? You can just have someone come take the dog out at noon for a walk, but definitely can't do that with a kid...

[clongirl]

It's been this way off and on for many years. Cost of living is extremely high, the demographics are young, and the school system has been a disaster (had been lottery based).

What's strange to me is how landlords here are notoriously dog unfriendly, yet there's still so many dogs!

[Pietro25]

Originally Posted by clongirl

...the school system has been a disaster (had been lottery based).

There are some bad schools, but your "disaster" is a myth. There are many good public schools too.

[NickB1967]

Articles from the New York Times and City Journal about this phenomenon in SF and some other cities. These cities have gentrified and de-ghettoized themselves, but at the price of becoming cities of "singletons" (and sometimes gays), and not places to raise families:

http://www.city-journal.org/2013/23_3_childless-cities.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/24/national/24childless.html?pagewanted=all

Takeaway quote: "Even the partial rebirth of American cities since then hasn’t been enough to lure families back. The much-ballyhooed and self-celebrating “creative class”—a demographic group that includes not only single professionals but also well-heeled childless couples, empty nesters, and college students—occupies much of the urban space once filled by families. Increasingly, our great American cities, from New York and Chicago to Los Angeles and Seattle, are evolving into playgrounds for the rich, traps for the poor, and way stations for the ambitious young en route eventually to less congested places."

[Hemlock140]

It's the same in Seattle, for the same reasons and has been for years now. There are also more cats than dogs or kids. That one stumps me.

In Seattle, it's cats, dogs and kids — in that order | FYI Guy | Seattle Times

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by Simon Feltser

Did you know there are MORE dogs than kids in the city of San Francisco?
In fact, dog lovers, as a group, is so large that they’re forming a PAC (Political Action Committee) to endorse candidates in various political races.

There is approximately 108,000 children and approximately 150,000 dogs in SF. Figures may be others, but the ratio remains

So why the shifting trend?
1. New parents are moving out of SF to seek lower cost but larger housing
2. Aging boomers, straight and gay couples are choosing to have a dog instead In fact, the “dog effect” is so strong in SF that politicians frequently debate issues related to pets, animal services, shelters, etc.

Seriously, I’m a dog lover, but the fact that there are more dogs than kids is unnerving to me. Are dogs replacing kids?

In inner cities that are not ghettoes, yes, they are. And for the two reasons you describe. I would add a third: Cities like San Francisco, that is, inner cities that have gentrified, so they are no longer ghettoes, are simply *too expensive* for families. Family raising has become a thing of the suburbs and exurbs, and it has *always* been much more a thing of the rural areas.

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by Hemlock140

It's the same in Seattle, for the same reasons and has been for years now. There are also more cats than dogs or kids. That one stumps me.

In Seattle, it's cats, dogs and kids — in that order | FYI Guy | Seattle Times

More fun to play with (often indoor) cats in the rain than doggies, which need outdoor space?